Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The saddest, stupidest sentence I've ever read

roughtype.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 52 posts

Re: The saddest, stupidest sentence I've ever read

#41

Post by bmaier »

aston wrote: post #29
bmaier wrote: post #7

He mistakes a mistaken analogy. The poets that he names are not selling out live readings and the sculptors are not putting on live creation events. When it comes to music, yes, a concert tour is more profitable for the artist than their recorded music is. This is the one difference between musicians and other artists. While I don't completely agree with Arrington, I do believe that this blog post calling it the sadd…

The number of recording artists/groups making money--that is, a profit--on tour is dwarfed by the ones trying to scrape by any other way they can ('real' jobs, selling cd's and other merch at shows, bar mitzvahs, etc.). Even a lot of the top-of-the-charts artists don't draw a big enough crowd to make their tour their livelihood.

Ah but even so they're selling most of that merchandise at shows that people are coming to, even if the ticket sales aren't raking in the cash for them

Re: The saddest, stupidest sentence I've ever read

#42

Post by nothingHappens »

Hi, could we try debating the content rather than the title?

The sentence in question, "Recorded music is nothing but marketing material to drive awareness of an artist," as spoken by Arrington, is pretty sad. The author has a good point. As a sometime musician, it makes me very sad.

But this sort of devaluation attitude toward music is well known about already. Ironically, it is usually blamed on those dang kids and their crazy Internet making it easy to download lots of recorded music without paying anything for it.

Ironically though, I think it's more the fault of the music business, who for decades have treated music as nothing but marketing material to drive sales of flat round pieces of plastic.

Re: The saddest, stupidest sentence I've ever read

#43

Post by EliAndrewC »

davidw wrote: post #37
pg wrote: post #31

It's embarrassing to see this story at the top of News.YC. Think of all the sentences in history (in recent history) that have sent streams of people to their deaths, and this is the saddest and stupidest he's ever read? Honestly, this is at worst a bike shed painted slightly the wrong shade of green.

I wasn't quite sure about posting it, but I thought the contrast between Carr and Arrington was interesting, and highlights a very important issue: what to do about intellectual property, and what the consequences are for various concerned groups. It is a very sensationalist title though. I guess it would have been better to change it to something like "Carr vs Arrington on IP".

Paul Graham himself writes good essays with sensationalist titles. For example, "Microsoft is Dead" was a great essay, but he had to explain in the essay itself that he wasn't actually arguing that Microsoft is dead. This seems similar; a sensationalist title that isn't remotely true, but with some decent content.

Re: The saddest, stupidest sentence I've ever read

#44

Post by pg »

EliAndrewC wrote: post #43
davidw wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't quite sure about posting it, but I thought the contrast between Carr and Arrington was interesting, and highlights a very important issue: what to do about intellectual property, and what the consequences are for various concerned groups. It is a very sensationalist title though. I guess it would have been better to change it to something like "Carr vs Arrington on IP".

Paul Graham himself writes good essays with sensationalist titles. For example, "Microsoft is Dead" was a great essay, but he had to explain in the essay itself that he wasn't actually arguing that Microsoft is dead. This seems similar; a sensationalist title that isn't remotely true, but with some decent content.

Calling a company dead is a metaphor. Saying something is the saddest thing you've read isn't; and in fact Carr writes as if he really believed it.

Re: The saddest, stupidest sentence I've ever read

#45

Post by falsestprophet »

razorburn wrote: post #40
pg wrote: post #31

It's embarrassing to see this story at the top of News.YC. Think of all the sentences in history (in recent history) that have sent streams of people to their deaths, and this is the saddest and stupidest he's ever read? Honestly, this is at worst a bike shed painted slightly the wrong shade of green.

Ever heard of hyperbole?

The literary device he used it irrelevant. It is simply not tasteful writing.

Re: The saddest, stupidest sentence I've ever read

#46

Post by aggieben »

petercooper wrote: post #20

Carr obviously didn't read Free! Why $0.00 Is the Future of Business ( http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/16-03/ff_free ) by Chris Anderson, the "Long Tail" guy. All sorts of things are just marketing material to drive awareness and sales of other items nowadays. It's not dumb of Arrington to consider music as a loss leader for artists.

Agreed. It's not an unserious view of intellectual property to say that some creative works aren't valuable in and of themselves (or shouldn't be), but may help drive the value of something else that is.

Re: The saddest, stupidest sentence I've ever read

#47

Post by stcredzero »

tim2 wrote: post #32
stcredzero wrote: post #30

He's right. Anyone who's been a true musician or a true artist eventually realizes that the "products" are just messages. They are not exclusively an end in themselves. They are messages about awareness. They are communications from one life to another. Really, the important thing is the life lived, and the inner life shared. This is why museums are nothing but directories or a table of contents. This is why "intelle…

I hate when artists try to sell me on some philosophical message. I could care less what some guy high on coke who has never demonstrated his analytical ability has to say. Yeah I'm one of those guys who listens because he appreciates music and its fascinating properties in and of itself, not for sung poetry or any other nonsense.

Even music "in and of itself" says something about the perception of sound. Note that I am talking specifically about "awareness." Not politics or philosophy. If you are a refined listener, then you are aware of these things on at least a subconscious level. I also hate it when artists and musicians spout muzzy-headed nonsense. But there are others who have had their awareness informed by what they practice. Sometimes they even have something good to say in interviews. Sturgeon's law applies here as well.

Re: The saddest, stupidest sentence I've ever read

#48

Post by ilamont »

razorburn wrote: post #40
pg wrote: post #31

It's embarrassing to see this story at the top of News.YC. Think of all the sentences in history (in recent history) that have sent streams of people to their deaths, and this is the saddest and stupidest he's ever read? Honestly, this is at worst a bike shed painted slightly the wrong shade of green.

Ever heard of hyperbole?

How about irony? Right below Carr's post is a promo for Carr's own book.

Re: The saddest, stupidest sentence I've ever read

#50

Post by bayareaguy »

pg wrote: post #31

It's embarrassing to see this story at the top of News.YC. Think of all the sentences in history (in recent history) that have sent streams of people to their deaths, and this is the saddest and stupidest he's ever read? Honestly, this is at worst a bike shed painted slightly the wrong shade of green.

Too bad there's no good way to downmod it.
Post reply on HN